Excerpts from the book: Qadianism: A Critical Study, by Syed Abdul Hasan Ali Nadvi © 1967
One of the illusions about Qadianism is that its emergence merely signifies the addition of one more sect to the large number of already existing sectarian and juristic schools of Islam, and that the followers of Qadianism are, at the most, a new sect. Thus, Qadianism is not a unique phenomenon in the history of Muslim sects and schools.
A careful study of Qadianism is bound to shatter this illusion and to force upon every fair-minded student the conclusion that Qadianism is a religion by itself, and the Qadianis a separate community (Ummah), parallel to Islam and the Ummah of Islam.
Among the different anti-Islam movements which have arisen in our history, Qadianism is unique. For, if other movements had been directed against Islam as a whole, Qadianism is a conspiracy which is specifically directed against the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be on him), and challenges the finality of Islam and the unity of Muslims. By repudiating the finality of prophethood, Qadianism obliterated the very borderlines which distinguished this Ummah from all other.
Moreover, it is also to be noted that the Mirza raised the standard of his prophethood and declared all those who did not accept his claim as Kafirs in a Muslim world which was already torn by dissension. By so doing, however, the Mirza raised an iron wall between himself and the Muslims. On the one side of this wall there are a few thousand followers of the Mirza, and on the other side is the rest of the Muslim world which stretches from Morocco to China and has great personalities, virtuous movements of reform, and valuable institutions. They stand isolated from and opposed to the whole of this world. Thus he unnecessarily added to the difficulties of Muslims, further aggravated their disunity and added a new complication to the problems facing them.
The Mirza has made no worthwhile contribution to the intellectual and religious heritage of Muslims which would call for his recognition and because of which he might deserve the gratitude of the present generation of Muslims. Nor did he initiate a broad-based movement for the revival of Islam which could profit the Muslims as a whole, nor help Muslims to solve any of the major problems facing them, nor did his movement contain any message for the contemporary civilization which is in the grips of major crisis and is interlocked in a life and death struggle. Nor can he even be credited with any significant achievement vis-a-vis the expansion of Islam either in India or Europe. His message remained addressed to the Muslims and of necessity could only lead to mental confusion and unnecessary religious squabbles within the Muslim community. If the Mirza can be considered successful, it is only in so far as he bequeathed to his family the legacy of spiritual leadership and worldly prosperity, the legacy of a kind of theocracy in which respect he is comparable to the Agha Khan and his ancestors.